House Joint Resolution 36 proposes a constitutional amendment to add a new section to Article III of the West Virginia Constitution establishing a right to reproductive freedom. The amendment would protect an individual’s ability to make and carry out reproductive decisions, including contraception, fertility treatment, continuing a pregnancy, miscarriage care, and abortion. It would also bar the state from burdening, penalizing, prohibiting, interfering with, or discriminating against a person exercising that right, or against those who assist them, unless the state can meet a least-restrictive-means standard tied to protecting health under widely accepted, evidence-based standards of care.
The resolution also specifies that abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability, but not when the treating physician determines it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health. It defines fetal viability as a case-by-case medical judgment about whether the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus with reasonable measures. If approved by the Legislature and voters, the proposal would place this protection directly into the state constitution and would be submitted to the electorate at the 2026 general election.
Impact
If adopted, HJR36 would amend the West Virginia Constitution and create a new constitutional right to reproductive freedom, limiting the state’s ability to regulate contraception, fertility treatment, pregnancy continuation, miscarriage care, and abortion. It would likely affect existing and future statutes governing reproductive healthcare by subjecting restrictions to constitutional review and by requiring the state to justify any burdens under a least-restrictive-means standard. The amendment would also protect providers and other assisting persons or entities from state interference when helping individuals exercise these rights, while preserving a viability-based limit on abortion with a life-or-health exception.
Sentiment
The bill text and available context suggest the measure is framed as a rights-protection proposal focused on reproductive healthcare freedom and health and safety. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or chamber sentiment in the available materials. Based on the language of the resolution, the proposal is clearly supportive of abortion and broader reproductive autonomy rights, and it appears intended to secure those protections at the constitutional level.
Contention
The main points of contention inherent in the proposal are the constitutional protection of abortion and the extent to which the state may regulate reproductive healthcare. Supporters would likely emphasize individual autonomy, access to contraception and fertility care, and protection for providers and helpers, while opponents would likely object to the amendment’s broad restriction on state regulation and its inclusion of abortion as a protected right. The viability standard and the exception for the pregnant patient’s life or health are likely to be central issues, especially because the amendment would place those limits in the constitution rather than leaving them to ordinary legislation.
Allowing healthcare workers to refuse to perform procedures related to sex reassignment or gender identity transitioning for religious or conscientious objection